close
more_vert

I am all for people's right to protest, peacefully and would defend their right to speak freely, but..

"Other demonstrators tried to stop the arrest and at least one police officer used CS spray, which hospitalised three people."

If folks are trying to resist/stop arrests..then they are asking for trouble.
I for one, want to see the Police maintaining order, within the law. As a taxpayer, I don't want to be paying the bills for the damage / havoc some protesting marches will create, if the Police are not able to maintain a basic level of control.

If the police can't keep control over a couple of peaceful protestors without resorting to what is essentially chemical warfare, they shouldn't be in their jobs.

EDIT: I can't be arsed.

geoffrey_prime wrote:
If folks are trying to resist/stop arrests..then they are asking for trouble.
Are you really saying that if someone disobeys a police officer then anything that officer does to them is OK?

Have you seen the video? The use of spray was not on anyone who was in any way a threat.

There is an issue of proportionality you're failing to acknowledge, even before we come to the justice of a given protest's cause and methods set against the police's role of defend the target.

geoffrey_prime wrote:
As a taxpayer, I don't want to be paying the bills for the damage / havoc some protesting marches will create
In this instance we're talking about an arrest for putting leaflets through a door. A door to Boots which was so not under attack that staff members treated those attacked with CS spray.

Even if we ignore the justice element and just go with your tory pounds and pence vision, what do you think the comparative costs are of arresting and detaining someone versus not doing so and permitting the 'havoc' that ensues when they put a leaflet through a door?